What evidence has DHS provided publicly to support its claim that Pretti had no ID at the scene?
Executive summary
The Department of Homeland Security publicly asserted that Alex Pretti “had … no ID” at the scene, a claim repeated in initial statements and press briefings [1] [2]. Reporting across multiple outlets finds DHS has not produced publicly any document, photograph, or footage that clearly shows Pretti lacked identification, and local authorities and fact-checkers say DHS has not explained how or when that determination was made [3] [4].
1. DHS’s public claim and where it appeared
DHS officials, including in an early statement read by Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin and echoed by other senior officials, said Pretti “had two magazines and no ID,” language that DHS amplified in press conferences and on social media as part of a broader account of the encounter [1] [2]. Media summaries and transcripts show the “no ID” phrase was presented alongside other contested assertions — that Pretti carried magazines and brandished a firearm — as part of DHS’s narrative about motive and threat [4] [5].
2. What DHS has publicly released (and what it hasn’t)
DHS released at least a photograph of a handgun it said was recovered from the scene and publicly referenced ammunition counts, but reporting indicates DHS has not released body-worn camera footage or any image that documents the absence of identification on Pretti at the time of the interaction [2] [6] [7]. Multiple news organizations note the department has said body-worn camera video exists and is under review, but that footage has not been made public to substantiate claims such as the lack of ID [6] [7].
3. Independent reporting and official pushback on evidentiary support
Local and national reporting highlights that DHS has not publicly produced a document or image showing no identification was present and that some DHS claims conflict with publicly available video and physical evidence; fact-checkers explicitly state DHS “hasn’t provided evidence” for several early assertions about the shooting [4] [5]. Minnesota law enforcement and prosecutors have accused federal officials of blocking access to evidence and sought court orders to prevent alteration or removal of material — a dispute that has further limited what independent investigators can confirm publicly about who possessed or removed identification at the scene [8] [9].
4. Questions about evidence handling and chain of custody
Reporting from CBS and others raises concerns that DHS-led handling of evidence — including the weapon — lacks a documented chain of custody and that material removed or photographed by federal agents may not have been processed in a way that preserves independent verification, which would complicate any later effort to show whether Pretti had identification on him at the time [10]. Other outlets noted inconsistencies in DHS descriptions (for example, two magazines claimed versus a social-media photo showing one), underlining how publicly available DHS materials do not clearly support the “no ID” statement [5] [11].
5. Bottom line: what public evidence exists to support the “no ID” claim
Based on available reporting, DHS made the claim publicly but has not released contemporaneous public evidence — such as a photo of Pretti’s person showing no ID, a forensic inventory detailing seized items, or released body-camera footage — that independently documents the absence of identification at the scene; local authorities, independent journalists, and fact-checkers say DHS has not explained how it reached that conclusion in the material already shared with the public [1] [3] [4] [6]. Court filings and news reports indicate contested control of evidence and unresolved chain-of-custody issues, meaning that as of the published coverage there is no publicly verifiable proof from DHS to substantiate the specific claim that Pretti “had no ID” at the moment of the encounter [10] [9].